Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

webkit.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 650 posts

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#251

Post by threeseed »

modeless wrote: post #230
threeseed wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple allows you to provide an alternative API on OSX but not on iOS. Microsoft is exactly the same. They do not support custom APIs on Windows Mobile AFAIK.

> Apple allows you to provide an alternative API on OSX I'll need a source for this claim considering that no driver-level Vulkan implementations are available on macOS.

No. Provide a source that Apple actively prevents it.

Developers can ask users for their admin password, sudo to root and largely do whatever they want including adding kernel extensions and drivers.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#252

Post by xenadu02 »

fooey wrote: post #98
NickGerleman wrote: post #9

"The major platform technologies in this space are Direct3D 12 from Microsoft, Metal from Apple, and Vulkan from the Khronos Group. While these technologies have similar design concepts, unfortunately none are available across all platforms." So Apple, the only company not supporting Vulkan on their platforms, is complaining that there isn't a cross-platform solution?

I don't know why Apple thinks they're going to have any sway over the people working on 3D graphics. Their hardware support for 3d graphics has been so awful for so long, I have a hard time imagining there's a very big user base they can leverage to get their way. So far as I can tell, what Apple wants here is almost completely irrelevant to the industry.

Apple is proposing an open working group collaborate to agree on an open standard for low-level 3D graphics and compute workloads that all browsers can support.

What part of that is "leverage to get their way"?

The post explicitly states that they don't expect the WebKit syntax to be the accepted syntax; it is merely one implementation that can help inform the discussions.

If you want to vent your rage about 3D graphics on the mac go file a radar.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#253

Post by uptown »

Geee wrote: post #170
madeofpalk wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like?

http://iswebrtcreadyyet.com/ Obviously Safari wouldn't matter if Apple allowed other browsers on iOS, but no, they insist on dragging the whole Internet a few years behind.

Except they allow other browsers on iOS.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#254

Post by spatulon »

ioquatix wrote: post #108
om2 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We expect DirectX 12 drivers to be more complete, more performant, and more likely to be available out of the box without a separate install. We expect Windows browsers will want to build on top of DirectX, not Vulkan.

Care to back up those assertions with real world evidence?

Chrome and Firefox felt there were sufficient problems with OpenGL driver availabity that they implemented WebGL using DirectX (via the ANGLE project), despite the more obvious mapping to OpenGL.

Is there any reason to believe that, unlike OpenGL, Vulkan drivers will be sufficiently widespread for browser vendors to use it on Windows?

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#255

Post by pharrington »

Rusky wrote: post #214
pharrington wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say Vulkan drivers will, for the forseeable future, be of lower quality than D3D12 drivers and lack official support. Lets assume I blindly accept this faith-based argument. WebGPU than, must be implemented on top of D3D12 and Metal, two already very different APIs. What, than, makes a hypothetical WebVulkan unfeasible in contrast to WebGPU?

A hypothetical WebVulkan is tied to an API that it is guaranteed to have to translate from. A hypothetical WebGPU could simply be tweaked to better support its multiple target APIs.

The straightforward translation and predictability of a hypothetical WebVulkan is a strong point in its favor. WebGPU's JavaScript interface can be changed arbitrarily, yes; there is nothing simple about that process.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#256

Post by surrealize »

om2 wrote: post #73
ChuckMcM wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The optics are just really bad. Apple could say "In the mean time we'll support Vulkan" and bam! there is a cross platform solution. Instead you say "We will generously let everyone implement our specifications, we hate to see everyone suffering so, but if everyone else works really hard to do what we say, things will be great!"

I don't get what you are suggesting. Apple supporting Vulkan on macOS and iOS wouldn't do anything to expose a new GPU API to the web. They are totally orthogonal. We're expecting work on the new web API to be super collaborative, so your framing is uncharitable and incorrect.

> Apple supporting Vulkan on macOS and iOS wouldn't do anything to expose a new GPU API to the web. They are totally orthogonal.

The web GPU API and the lower-level API aren't "totally orthogonal" if you're using the Metal shader language in your web GPU API! You're trying get web authors to use (a part of) Metal! It's totally not orthogonal.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#257

Post by xenadu02 »

nkkollaw wrote: post #206
vlozko wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know what a proposal is, by definition? Such things tend to go through a number of web standard committees and are often changed throughout the process. It's not like Apple can directly dictate web standards and expect everyone to fall in line.

I know, but they could make a proposal based on what most people already agree on, instead of their own thing made for Metal.

That's not true because there is no alternative standard proposed for low-level graphics on the web. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. DOES. NOT. EXIST.

The major browser vendors have basically already committed to this sort of effort and the GPU vendors are signed on as well. The blog post even says they don't expect the final syntax to look like their proposed syntax. It's called a prototype for a reason and it helps inform the thinking around what to do and what not to do.

This is just HN anti-Apple mania. If you have a bone to pick about Vulkan support then go file a radar. Email DTS. Email Apple leadership and lay out your case in detail for why Apple should support Vulkan. None of that has anything to do with trying to standardize low-level graphics on the web.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#258

Post by AndrewKemendo »

eridius wrote: post #45
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #17

Biggest questions I have are: 1. What is the (proposed) backward compatibility across devices? 2.Given that it is structured for Metal shaders, what are the plans for other, non-apple devices? I see the hat tip to D3D and Vulkan, but I assume they need to get on board first - any early takers? After all common standard means cross-platform hardware support, something Apple has never really embraced.

The blog post explicitly says that they think that discussion around the shading language to be "one of the most fun parts of the standardization process" (i.e. most contentious), and they explicitly said they're deferring the issue of shading language and just accepting an existing language "for now", and that they picked the Metal Shading Language because the authors of the proposal here are using Apple platforms.…

Yea I saw all of that, I'm wondering if it's just lip service or if they did any outreach beforehand.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#259

Post by hota_mazi »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #175
zbuttram wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What people seem to be missing here is that based on available info it seems Microsoft isn't officially supporting Vulkan either. Sure Nvidia and AMD have released drivers for Windows that have Vulkan support, but we're talking about a web standard that would need to be implemented by browser makers and if Microsoft isn't going to use Vulkan, then what do they implement as the backing for this new standard in Edge? P…

Why are they so hostile to Vulkan and what problems does Vulkan, which is vendor independent and open, have that adding a new API to support to the pile would not?

NIAA.

Not Invented At Apple.

Re: Apple proposes new web 3D graphics API

#260

Post by Gorbzel »

sipos wrote: post #235
om2 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you'll want to talk to Apple Developer Relations and see if they can put you in touch with the teams responsible for the GPU-level stuff. We as the browser team can't do much with this feedback.

It is a serious problem for the future of Apple that they have almost completely lost the support of software developers. It used to be that most software developers had MacBook Pros and, the ones that didn't wished they did. Now software developers are generally buying non-Apple machines and running Linux or Windows. In the short term, this is only a tiny market so the loss of sales is irrelevant but, these people a…

Oh please. Stop claiming every pet issue you have is shared by every developer and that it's "already too late."
Post reply on HN